Alongside corporate giants like Philip
Morris and Wal-Mart, Monsanto Co. is locked in the crosshairs of
consumer criticism with nowhere to run.

A quick Google search will reveal
staggering amounts of information on Monsanto’s long history of paying
lobbyists to block government regulations on genetically modified
organisms (GMOs), putting small farmers out of business, polluting the
environment, allegations of false advertising and lacking adequate
safety testing on their products, along with helping to engineer some of
the most harmful chemicals to date, including Agent Orange.

These seeds have already become dominant
in some developing nations, effectively eliminating the use of
conventional and heirloom seeds, along with the sustainable farming
practices that have fed humans since the dawn of agricultural societies.

But as skeletons tumble out of Monsanto’s
deep, dark closet and spill onto the Internet, consumer awareness
continues to grow and so does the perceived importance of making
conscious decisions every time a shopper exchanges the almighty dollar
for food.

Local farmers and small business owners
continue striving to meet the increasing demand for sustainable, organic
foods despite limited supply and heavy competition from genetically
enhanced foods that dominate the 21st-century marketplace.

Monsanto’s legacy can be traced by a
series of partnerships with significant corporate entities dating back
to the company’s founding in 1901.

John Francis Queeny, a seasoned veteran
of the pharmaceutical industry, funded the company’s startup, along with
some financial backing from a soft drink distributor. In less than a
year, Queeny partnered with the Coca-Cola Co. upon introducing
Monsanto’s first cash cow — the artificial sweetener saccharin, still
sold as Sweet’N Low today.

In the 1940s, Monsanto worked in
conjunction with the U.S. military officials to help develop the first
nuclear weapon in the endeavor famously known as the Manhattan Project.
Later, Monsanto partnered with Dow Chemical Co. in the 1960s to
manufacture Agent Orange, a toxic herbicide intended to be used as part
of the U.S. military’s herbicidal warfare initiative during the Vietnam
War. This venture tragically affected nearly 40,000 American soldiers
while serving in Vietnam, resulting in a class-action lawsuit that cost
Monsanto nearly $90 million in damages.

Two other expensive missteps in
Monsanto’s product line include DDT, a pesticide banned by Congress in
1972 due to harmful environmental effects, and the controversial
artificial sweetener aspartame, now deemed safe by the United States
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) despite previous scientific claims that
consumption might result in harmful side effects.

These controversies are difficult to
overlook; Monsanto, however, has opted to omit them from the company’s
historic timeline illustrated on its website, arguably violating the
company’s pledge of transparency and integrity.

More importantly, it reveals the company’s inclination to keep secrets.

Perhaps in an attempt to distance itself
from a damning past — or to evade pending lawsuits — Monsanto went
through a series of transactions in 2000 to legally distinguish the
“Original Monsanto Co.” from “Today’s Monsanto Co.”

As stated on the company’s website,
“While we share the name and history of a company that was founded in
1901, the Monsanto of today is focused on agriculture and supporting
farmers around the world in their mission to produce more while
conserving more.”

The “Original Monsanto Co.” merged with
Pharmacia and Upjohn in 2000, then conveniently re-spawned as a
stand-alone subsidiary of Pharmacia called the new Monsanto later that
year.

Despite Monsanto’s new mission to support
farmers around the world, the company now controls the global seed
market to such an extent that many conventional farmers are forced to
use Monsanto’s gene-patented seeds.

“From a security perspective, we are at risk when
we rely on just one or a few varieties of any crop.”

She notes that a tremendous amount of
crop biodiversity has been lost in the last century and the introduction
of genetically engineered seeds has accelerated the process.

“We cannot contain genetic material
outside of the laboratory. Pollen drifts and seed spills can result in
interbreeding with non-GMO varieties, contaminating (them).”

Every seed that’s genetically enhanced by
Monsanto contains a patented gene sold under exclusive rights so that
farmers must purchase them anew each year, or else run the risk of being
sued by Monsanto for patent infringement.

As explained by Joe Logan, agricultural
programs director at the Ohio Environmental Council, “This may be
creating an uncompetitive market for seeds bought by farmers, costing
Ohio farmers an estimated $115 million annually in excess seed costs.”

To add insult to injury, Monsanto has
sued farmers in the United States and Canada when the firm’s patented
genetic material has inadvertently contaminated their crops.

Percy Schmeiser, a Canadian farmer whose
fields were contaminated with Monsanto’s Round-Up Ready Canola due to
pollen drift, was sued by Monsanto in 1997 for patent infringement.
Monsanto won the case in a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling.

“It’s not just organic farmers who are
worried about contamination from genetically engineered seeds,” Goland
says. “There are many non-organic farmers who choose to grow non-GMO
crops and they have particular markets that they can access because
they’re GMO free. Farmers risk losing those markets, particularly
European markets, due to widespread GMOs.”

On Jan. 27, the Obama administration
fully deregulated Monsanto’s genetically modified alfalfa, despite
evidence provided by the United States Department of Agriculture
revealing the threat that it poses to both organic and conventional
agriculture.

Further, GMO labeling laws are still at
bay in the U.S. even though other nations, such as Japan, China, Korea,
Australia, New Zealand and the European Union, now require mandatory GMO
labeling.

Josh Rinckel, an organic buyer for Jungle
Jim’s International Market in Fairfield, says, “The market for organic
produce has certainly been growing. It isn’t growing by leaps and
bounds, but every year our organic sales increase.”

Nevertheless, the market for organic
foods still pales in comparison to Monsanto’s market, which earned the
company roughly $6 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2011.

Meredith Trombly, co-founder of Fresh
Table in Findlay Market, testifies to the increase in organic demand
over the last decade but also highlights a few limitations to supplying
organic foods in the Midwest.

“It’s really hard to find a steady flow
of organic and local foods because our growing season is short and
there’s not a wide acceptance for organic foods here yet,” Trombly says.

Barry Cooper, co-owner of Daisy Mae’s
Market at Findlay Market, reports that only 10 percent of all produce
sold at his stand is organic.

“The bottom line is we have to be able to
make money,” Cooper says. “If we put out bananas for 59 cents per pound
and put organic bananas right next to it for 79 cents per pound, we end
up throwing the organic bananas away at the end of the week because
they rot. They don’t sell.”

Sales aside, more than 30 farmer’s
markets now exist in Cincinnati and the city’s suburban outskirts, many
of which have opened in the past 10 years, revealing a small but certain
place for organics and sustainable foods in the marketplace.

Bryan Madison, owner of Madison Farms in
Adams County, says, “Farmers markets are all over the place now. Back in
the ‘90s, those markets didn’t exist. What does that mean? It means
that there is a growing demand for organics. People want to know who’s
growing their food and where it’s coming from.”

Trombly concludes, “Awareness of GMOs and
organics is growing in the Midwest. I think the market for organic
foods is here to stay.”